Khosrow I. He was the successor of his father Kavadh I. Khosrow I was the twenty-second Sasanian Emperor of Persia, one of its most celebrated emperors, he laid the foundations of many cities and opulent palaces, oversaw the repair of trade roads as well as the building of numerous bridges and dams. His reign is furthermore marked by the numerous wars fought against the Sassanid's neighboring archrivals, the Roman-Byzantine Empire, as part of the centuries-long lasting Roman–Persian Wars; the most important wars under his reign were the Lazic War, fought over Colchis and the Byzantine–Sasanian War of 572–591. During Khosrow's ambitious reign and science flourished in Persia and the Sasanian Empire reached its peak of glory and prosperity, his rule was preceded by his father's and succeeded by Hormizd IV. Khosrow Anushiruwan is one of the most popular emperors in Iranian culture and literature and, outside of Iran, his name became, like that of Caesar in the history of Rome, a designation of the Sasanian kings.
He introduced a rational system of taxation, based upon a survey of landed possessions, which his father had begun, tried in every way to increase the welfare and the revenues of his empire. His army was in discipline decidedly superior to the Byzantines, was well paid, he was interested in literature and philosophical discussions. Under his reign chess was introduced from India, the famous book of Kalilah and Dimnah was translated, he thus became renowned as a wise king. Khosrow I was born in Ardestan, an ancient town, built by the Achaemenids, close to the major city of Spahan, he was the third son of Kavadh I, had three brothers named Xerxes and Kawus. Khosrow's mother was the sister of Bawi, making Khosrow I related to the Parthian House of Ispahbudhan, his father was involved with a group of Zoroastrians called the Mazdakites. The Mazdakites believed in an egalitarian society and many lower class peasants supported the Mazdakite revolution. Kavadh, wanting to centralize power by taking power away from the great noble families, supported this movement.
In 531, while on his death-bed, appointed Khosrow as his successor. However, upon Kavadh's death, the Mazdakites gave their loyalty to Kavadh's eldest son, while the noble families and the Zoroastrian Magi gave their support to Khosrow I. Khosrow presented himself as an anti-Mazdakite supporter. He, much like his father, believed in a strong centralized government. Khosrow defeated him as well as his Mazdakite followers. Subsequently, Mazdak, as well as a majority of his followers, were executed for his heretical beliefs and Khosrow took the Sasanian throne. At Khosrow's succession and Sasanian Persia were in open conflict with each other. Neither empire was able to get an advantage of the other, causing Emperor Justinian and King Khosrow to agree on a peace treaty in 531. However, in 531, along with other members of the Persian aristocracy became involved in a conspiracy in which they tried to overthrow Khosrow I and make Kavadh, the son of Kavadh I's second eldest son Djamasp, the king of the Sasanian Empire.
Upon learning the plot, Khosrow I executed all his brothers, their offsprings, along with Bawi and the other "Persian notables" who were involved. Khosrow I ordered the execution of Kavadh, still a child, was away from the court, being raised by Adergoudounbades. Khosrow sent orders to kill Kavadh, but Adergoudounbades disobeyed and brought him up in secret, until he was betrayed to the shah in 541 by his own son, Bahram. Khosrow had him executed, but Kavadh, or someone claiming to be him, managed to flee to the Byzantine Empire. In 532, Khosrow and Justinian, emperor of the Eastern Roman/Byzantine Empire concluded Pax Perpetuum, or the Eternal Peace in hopes of settling all land disputes between the Romans and Sasanians. Khosrow I represents the epitome of the philosopher king in the Sasanian Empire. Upon his ascent to the throne, Khosrow did not restore power to the feudal nobility or the magi, but centralized his government. Khosrow's reign is considered to be one of the most successful within the Sasanian Empire.
The peace agreement between Rome and Persia in 531 gave Khosrow the chance to consolidate power and focus his attention on internal improvement. His reforms and military campaigns marked a renaissance of the Sasanian Empire, which spread philosophic beliefs as well as trade goods from the far east to the far west; the internal reforms under Khosrow were much more important than those on the exterior frontier. The subsequent reforms resulted in the rise of a bureaucratic state at the expense of the great noble families, strengthening the central government and the power of the Shahanshah; the army too was reorganized and tied to the central government rather than local nobility allowing greater organization, faster mobilization and a far greater cavalry corps. Reforms in taxation provided the empire with stability and a much stronger economy, allowing prolonged military campaigns as well as greater revenues for the bureaucracy. Khosrow's tax reforms have been praised by several scholars; the tax reforms, which were started under Kavadh I and implemented by Khosrow, strengthened the royal court by a great deal.
Prior to Khosrow and Kavadh's reigns, a majority of the land was owned by seven Parthian families: Suren, Karen, Spandiy
The Sasanian Empire known as the Sassanian, Sassanid or Neo-Persian Empire, was the last kingdom of the Persian Empire before the rise of Islam. Named after the House of Sasan, it ruled from 224 to 651 AD; the Sasanian Empire succeeded the Parthian Empire and was recognised as one of the leading world powers alongside its neighbouring arch-rival the Roman-Byzantine Empire for a period of more than 400 years. The Sasanian Empire was founded by Ardashir I, after the fall of the Parthian Empire and the defeat of the last Arsacid king, Artabanus V. At its greatest extent, the Sasanian Empire encompassed all of today's Iran, Eastern Arabia, the Levant, the Caucasus, large parts of Turkey, much of Central Asia and Pakistan. According to a legend, the vexilloid of the Sasanian Empire was the Derafsh Kaviani; the Sasanian Empire during Late Antiquity is considered to have been one of Iran's most important, influential historical periods and constituted the last great Iranian empire before the Muslim conquest and the adoption of Islam.
In many ways, the Sasanian period witnessed the peak of ancient Iranian civilisation. The Sasanians' cultural influence extended far beyond the empire's territorial borders, reaching as far as Western Europe, Africa and India, it played a prominent role in the formation of both Asian medieval art. Much of what became known as Islamic culture in art, architecture and other subject matter was transferred from the Sasanians throughout the Muslim world. Conflicting accounts shroud the details of the fall of the Parthian Empire and subsequent rise of the Sassanian Empire in mystery; the Sassanian Empire was established in Estakhr by Ardashir I. Papak was the ruler of a region called Khir. However, by the year 200 he had managed to overthrow Gochihr and appoint himself the new ruler of the Bazrangids, his mother, was the daughter of the provincial governor of Pars. Papak and his eldest son Shapur managed to expand their power over all of Pars; the subsequent events are due to the elusive nature of the sources.
It is certain, that following the death of Papak, who at the time was the governor of Darabgerd, became involved in a power struggle of his own with his elder brother Shapur. Sources reveal that Shapur, leaving for a meeting with his brother, was killed when the roof of a building collapsed on him. By the year 208, over the protests of his other brothers who were put to death, Ardashir declared himself ruler of Pars. Once Ardashir was appointed shah, he moved his capital further to the south of Pars and founded Ardashir-Khwarrah; the city, well protected by high mountains and defensible due to the narrow passes that approached it, became the centre of Ardashir's efforts to gain more power. It was surrounded by a high, circular wall copied from that of Darabgird. Ardashir's palace was on the north side of the city. After establishing his rule over Pars, Ardashir extended his territory, demanding fealty from the local princes of Fars, gaining control over the neighbouring provinces of Kerman, Isfahan and Mesene.
This expansion came to the attention of Artabanus V, the Parthian king, who ordered the governor of Khuzestan to wage war against Ardashir in 224, but Ardashir was victorious in the ensuing battles. In a second attempt to destroy Ardashir, Artabanus himself met Ardashir in battle at Hormozgan, where the former met his death. Following the death of the Parthian ruler, Ardashir went on to invade the western provinces of the now defunct Parthian Empire. At that time the Arsacid dynasty was divided between supporters of Artabanus V and Vologases VI, which allowed Ardashir to consolidate his authority in the south with little or no interference from the Parthians. Ardashir was aided by the geography of the province of Fars, separated from the rest of Iran. Crowned in 224 at Ctesiphon as the sole ruler of Persia, Ardashir took the title shahanshah, or "King of Kings", bringing the 400-year-old Parthian Empire to an end, beginning four centuries of Sassanid rule. In the next few years, local rebellions occurred throughout the empire.
Nonetheless, Ardashir I further expanded his new empire to the east and northwest, conquering the provinces of Sistan, Khorasan, Margiana and Chorasmia. He added Bahrain and Mosul to Sassanid's possessions. Sassanid inscriptions claim the submission of the Kings of Kushan and Mekran to Ardashir, although based on numismatic evidence it is more that these submitted to Ardashir's son, the future Shapur I. In the west, assaults against Hatra and Adiabene met with less success. In 230, Ardashir raided deep into Roman territory, a Roman counter-offensive two years ended inconclusively, although the Roman emperor, Alexander Severus, celebrated a triumph in Rome. Ardashir I's son Shapur I continued the expansion of the empire, conquering Bactria and the western portion of the Kushan Empire, while leading several campaigns against Rome. Invading Roman Mesopotamia, Shapur I captured Carrhae and Nisibis, but in 243 the Roman general Timesitheus defeated the Persians at Rhesaina and regained the lost territories.
The emperor Gordian III's subsequent advance down the Euphrates was defea
A fire temple in Zoroastrianism is the place of worship for Zoroastrians called dar-e mehr or agiyari. In the Zoroastrian religion, together with clean water, are agents of ritual purity. Clean, white "ash for the purification ceremonies regarded as the basis of ritual life", which "are the rites proper to the tending of a domestic fire, for the temple is that of the hearth fire raised to a new solemnity". For, one "who sacrifices unto fire with fuel in his hand... is given happiness". As of 2019, there were 167 fire temples in the world, of which 45 in Mumbai, 105 in the rest of India, 17 in other countries. There is a religious custom in India of not allowing Zoroastrian women to enter the Fire Temple and the Tower of Silence if they marry a non-Zoroastrian person; this custom has been challenged before the Supreme Court of India after a Zoroastrian woman was denied entry into Zoroastrian institutions. Main article: Atar, Zoroastrian fire. First evident in the 9th century BCE, the Zoroastrian rituals of fire are contemporary with that of Zoroastrianism itself.
It appears at the same time as the shrine cult and is contemporaneous with the introduction of Atar as a divinity. There is no allusion to a temple of fire in the Avesta proper, nor is there any Old Persian language word for one; that the rituals of fire was a doctrinal modification and absent from early Zoroastrianism is evident in the Atash Nyash. In the oldest passages of that liturgy, it is the hearth fire that speaks to "all those for whom it cooks the evening and morning meal", which Boyce observes is not consistent with sanctified fire; the temple is an later development: from Herodotus it is known that in the mid-5th century BCE the Zoroastrians worshipped to the open sky, ascending mounds to light their fires. Strabo confirms this, noting that in the 6th century, the sanctuary at Zela in Cappadocia was an artificial mound, walled in, but open to the sky, although there is no evidence whatsoever that the Zela-sanctuary was Zoroastrian. Although the "burning of fire" was a key element in Zoroastrian worship, the burning of "eternal" fire, as well as the presence of "light" in worship, was a key element in many other religions.
By the Hellenic Parthian era, there were two places of worship in Zoroastrianism: one, called bagin or ayazan, was a sanctuary dedicated to a specific divinity. The second, the atroshan, were the "places of burning fire" which became more and more prevalent as the iconoclastic movement gained support. Following the rise of the Sassanid dynasty, the shrines to the Yazatas continued to exist, but with the statues – by law – either abandoned or replaced by fire altars; as Schippman observed, there is no evidence during the Sassanid era that the fires were categorized according to their sanctity. "It seems probable that there were only two, namely the Atash-i Vahram, the lesser Atash-i Adaran, or'Fire of Fires', a parish fire, as it were, serving a village or town quarter". It was only in the Atash-i Vahram that fire was kept continuously burning, with the Adaran fires being annually relit. While the fires themselves had special names, the structures did not, it has been suggested that "the prosaic nature of the middle Persian names reflect a desire on the part of those who fostered the temple-cult... to keep it as close as possible in character to the age-old cult of the hearth-fire, to discourage elaboration".
The Battle of al-Qādisiyyah and the Battle of Nihavānd were instrumental to the collapse of the Sassanid Empire and state-sponsored Zoroastrianism. The faith was practiced by the aristocracy but large numbers of fire temples did not exist; some fire temples continued with their original purpose. Legend says that some took fire with them and it most served as a reminder of their faith in an persecuted community since fire originating from a temple was not a tenet of the religious practice; the oldest remains of what has been identified as a fire temple are those on Mount Khajeh, near Lake Hamun in Sistan. Only traces of the foundation and ground-plan survive and have been tentatively dated to the 3rd or 4th century BCE; the temple was rebuilt during the Parthian era, enlarged during Sassanid times. The characteristic feature of the Sassanid fire temple was its domed sanctuary where the fire-altar stood; this sanctuary always had a square ground plan with a pillar in each corner that supported the dome.
Archaeological remains and literary evidence from Zend commentaries on the Avesta suggest that the sanctuary was surrounded by a passageway on all four sides. "On a number of sites the gombad, made of rubble masonry with courses of stone, is all that survives, so such ruins are popularly called in Fars čahār-tāq or'four arches'."Ruins of temples of the Sassanid era have been found in various parts of the former empire in the southwest, but the biggest and most impressive are those of Adur Gushnasp in Media Minor. Many more ruins are popularly identified as the remains of Zoroastrian fire temples when their purpose is of evidently secular nature, or are the remains of a temple of the shrine cults, or as is the case of a fort-like fir
The obol was a form of ancient Greek currency and weight. Obols were used from early times. According to Plutarch they were spits of copper or bronze traded by weight, while six obols make a drachma or a handful, since, as many as the hand could grasp. Heraklides of Pontus in his work on "Etymologies" mentions the obols of Heraion and derives the origin of obolos from obelos; this is confirmed by the historian Ephorus on his work "On Inventions". Excavations at Argos discovered several dozen of these early obols, dated well before 800 BC. Archaeologists today describe the iron spits as "utensil-money" since excavated hoards indicate that during the Late Geometric period they were exchanged in handfuls of six spits, they were not used for manufacturing artifacts as metallurgical analyses suggest, but they were most used as token-money. Plutarch states, they retained the cumbersome and impractical bars rather than proper coins to discourage the pursuit of wealth. In Classical Athens, obols were traded as silver coins.
Six obols made up the drachma. There were coins worth two obols and three obols; each obol was divisible into eight "coppers". During this era, an obol purchased a chous of wine. Three obols was a standard rate for prostitutes; the deceased were buried with an obol placed in the mouth of the corpse, so that—once a deceased's shade reached Hades—they would be able to pay Charon for passage across the river Acheron or Styx. Legend had it that those without enough wealth or whose friends refused to follow proper burial rites were forced to wander the banks of the river for one hundred years; the obol or obolus was a measurement of Greek and apothecaries' weight. In ancient Greece, it was reckoned as 1⁄6 drachma. Under Roman rule, it was defined about 0.57 grams. The apothecaries' system reckoned the obol or obolus as 1⁄48 ounce or 1⁄2 scruple; the obolus, along with the mirror, was a symbol of new schismatic heretics in the short story "The Theologians" by Argentine author Jorge Luis Borges. In the story's discussion of the circularity of time and the transmigration of the soul through several bodies the author uses a quote of Luke 12:59, mistranslated as "no one will be released from prison until he has paid the last obolus" since Luke calls the coin a lepton rather than an obolus.
The currency of the United States of the Ionian Islands was called the Obol The British halfpenny formerly known as the obol Obelisks, which derived from the bars or the critical mark 2. Vol. I of the Loeb Classical Library edition,1914 Plutarch, Lycurgus, 9 A History of Measures The Use of Obeliskoi How we came to know about the iron obols, the antecedents of the drachma
A mint is an industrial facility which manufactures coins that can be used in currency. The history of mints correlates with the history of coins. In the beginning, hammered coinage or cast coinage were the chief means of coin minting, with resulting production runs numbering as little as the hundreds or thousands. In modern mints, coin dies are manufactured in large numbers and planchets are made into milled coins by the billions. With the mass production of currency, the production cost is weighed. For example, it costs the United States Mint much less than 25 cents to make a quarter, the difference in production cost and face value helps fund the minting body; the earliest metallic money did not consist of coins, but of unminted metal in the form of rings and other ornaments or of weapons, which were used for thousands of years by the Egyptian and Assyrian empires. Metals were well suited to represent wealth, owing to their great commodity value per unit weight or volume, their durability and rarity.
The best metals for coinage are gold, platinum, tin, aluminum, zinc and their alloys. The first mint was established in Lydia in the 7th century BC, for coining gold and electrum; the Lydian innovation of manufacturing coins under the authority of the state spread to neighboring Greece, where a number of city-states operated their own mints. Some of the earliest Greek mints were within city-states on Greek islands such as Crete. At about the same time and mints appeared independently in China and spread to Korea and Japan; the manufacture of coins in the Roman Empire, dating from about the 4th century BC influenced development of coin minting in Europe. The origin of the word "mint" is ascribed to the manufacture of silver coin at Rome in 269 BC at the temple of Juno Moneta; this goddess became the personification of money, her name was applied both to money and to its place of manufacture. Roman mints were spread across the Empire, were sometimes used for propaganda purposes; the populace learned of a new Roman Emperor when coins appeared with the new Emperor's portrait.
Some of the emperors who ruled only for a short time made sure. Ancient coins were made by striking between engraved dies; the Romans cast their larger copper coins in clay moulds carrying distinctive markings, not because they knew nothing of striking, but because it was not suitable for such large masses of metal. Casting is now used only by counterfeiters; the most ancient coins were cast in bulletshaped or conical moulds and marked on one side by means of a die, struck with a hammer. The "blank" or unmarked piece of metal was placed on a small anvil, the die was held in position with tongs; the reverse or lower side of the coin received a “rough incuse” by the hammer. A rectangular mark, a “square incuse,” was made by the sharp edges of the little anvil, or punch; the rich iconography of the obverse of the early electrum coins contrasts with the dull appearance of their reverse which carries only punch marks. The shape and number of these punches varied according to their weight-standard. Subsequently, the anvil was marked in various ways, decorated with letters and figures of beasts, still the anvil was replaced by a reverse die.
The spherical blanks soon gave place to lenticular-shaped ones. The blank was struck between cold dies. One blow was insufficient, the method was similar to that still used in striking medals in high relief, except that the blank is now allowed to cool before being struck. With the substitution of iron for bronze as the material for dies, about 300 AD, the practice of striking the blanks while they were hot was discarded. In the Middle Ages bars of metal were hammered out on an anvil. Portions of the flattened sheets were cut out with shears, struck between dies and again trimmed with shears. A similar method had been used in Ancient Egypt during the Ptolemaic Kingdom, but had been forgotten. Square pieces of metal were cut from cast bars, converted into round disks by hammering and struck between dies. In striking, the lower die was fixed into a block of wood, the blank piece of metal laid upon it by hand; the upper die was placed on the blank, kept in position by means of a holder round, placed a roll of lead to protect the hand of the operator while heavy blows were struck with a hammer.
An early improvement was the introduction of a tool resembling a pair of tongs, the two dies being placed one at the extremity of each leg. This avoided the necessity of readjusting the dies between blows, ensured greater accuracy in the impression. Minting by means of a falling weight intervened between the hand hammers and the screw press in many places. In Birmingham in particular this system became developed and was long in use. In 1553, the French engineer Aubin Olivier introduced screw presses for striking coins, together with rolls for reducing the cast bars and machines for punching-out round disks from flattened sheets of metal. 8 to 12 men took over from each other every quarter of an hour to maneuver the arms driving the screw which struck the medals. The rolls were driven by horses, mules or water-power. Henry II came up against hostility on the par
Ctesiphon was an ancient city, located on the eastern bank of the Tigris, about 35 kilometres southeast of present-day Baghdad. Ctesiphon served as a royal capital of the Persian Empire in the Parthian and Sasanian eras for over eight hundred years. Ctesiphon remained the capital of the Sasanian Empire until the Muslim conquest of Persia in 651 AD. Ctesiphon developed into a rich commercial metropolis, merging with the surrounding cities along both shores of the river, including the Hellenistic city of Seleucia. Ctesiphon and its environs were therefore sometimes referred to as "The Cities". In the late sixth and early seventh century, it was one of the largest cities in the world. During the Roman–Parthian Wars, Ctesiphon fell three times to the Romans, fell twice during Sasanian rule, it was the site of the Battle of Ctesiphon in 363 AD. After the Muslim invasion the city fell into decay and was depopulated by the end of the eighth century, its place as a political and economic center taken by the Abbasid capital at Baghdad.
The most conspicuous structure remaining today is the Taq Kasra, sometimes called the Archway of Ctesiphon. The Latin name Ctesiphon derives from Ancient Greek Ktēsiphôn; this is ostensibly a Greek toponym based on a personal name, although it may be a Hellenized form of a local name, reconstructed as Tisfōn or Tisbōn. In Iranian-language texts of the Sasanian era, it is spelled as tyspwn, which can be read as Tīsfōn, Tēsifōn, etc. in Manichaean Parthian, in Middle Persian and in Christian Sogdian languages. The New Persian form is Tisfun. Texts from the Assyrian Church of the East's synods referred to the city as Qṭēspōn or some times Māḥôzē when referring to the metropolis of Seleucia-Ctesiphon. In modern Arabic, the name is Ṭaysafūn or Qaṭaysfūn or as al-Mada'in. "According to Yāqūt, quoting Ḥamza, the original form was Ṭūsfūn or Tūsfūn, arabicized as Ṭaysafūn." The Armenian name of the city was Tizbon. Ctesiphon is first mentioned in the Book of Ezra of the Old Testament as Kasfia/Casphia, it is mentioned in the Talmud as Aktisfon.
Ctesiphon is located at Al-Mada'in, 32 km southeast of the modern city of Baghdad, along the river Tigris. Ctesiphon measured 30 square kilometers, more than twice the surface of 13.7-square-kilometer fourth-century imperial Rome. The archway of Chosroes was once a part of the royal palace in Ctesiphon and is estimated to date between the 3rd and 6th centuries AD, it is located in. Ctesiphon was founded in the late 120s BC, it was built on the site of a military camp established across from Seleucia by Mithridates I of Parthia. The reign of Gotarzes I saw Ctesiphon reach a peak as a commercial center; the city became the Empire's capital circa 58 BC during the reign of Orodes II. The city merged with the old Hellenistic capital of Seleucia and other nearby settlements to form a cosmopolitan metropolis; the reason for this westward relocation of the capital could have been in part due to the proximity of the previous capitals to the Scythian incursions. Strabo abundantly describes the foundation of Ctesiphon: In ancient times Babylon was the metropolis of Assyria.
Nearby is situated a village called Ctesiphon, a large village. This village the kings of the Parthians were wont to make their winter residence, thus sparing the Seleucians, in order that the Seleucians might not be oppressed by having the Scythian folk or soldiery quartered amongst them; because of the Parthian power, Ctesiphon is a city rather than a village. Because of its importance, Ctesiphon was a major military objective for the leaders of the Roman Empire in their eastern wars; the city was captured by Rome five times in its history – three times in the 2nd century alone. The emperor Trajan captured Ctesiphon in 116, but his successor, decided to willingly return Ctesiphon in 117 as part of a peace settlement; the Roman general Avidius Cassius captured Ctesiphon in 164 during another Parthian war, but abandoned it when peace was concluded. In 197, the emperor Septimius Severus sacked Ctesiphon and carried off thousands of its inhabitants, whom he sold into slavery. By 226, Ctesiphon was in the hands of the Sasanian Empire, who made it their capital and had laid an end to the Parthian dynasty of Iran.
Ctesiphon was enlarged and flourished during their rule, thus turning into a metropolis, known by in Arabic as al-Mada'in, in Aramaic as Mahoze. The oldest inhabited places of Ctesiphon were on its eastern side, which in Islamic Arabic sources is called "the Old City", where the residence of the Sasanians, known as the White Palace, was located; the southern side of Ctesiphon was known as Asbānbar or Aspānbar, known by its prominent halls, games and baths. Taq Kasra was l
Anahita is the Old Persian form of the name of an Iranian goddess and appears in complete and earlier form as Aredvi Sura Anahita, the Avestan name of an Indo-Iranian cosmological figure venerated as the divinity of "the Waters" and hence associated with fertility and wisdom. Aredvi Sura Anahita is Ardwisur Anahid or Nahid in Middle and Modern Persian, Anahit in Armenian. An iconic shrine cult of Aredvi Sura Anahita was – together with other shrine cults – "introduced in the 4th century BCE and lasted until it was suppressed in the wake of an iconoclastic movement under the Sassanids."The Greek and Roman historians of classical antiquity refer to her either as Anaïtis or identified her with one of the divinities from their own pantheons. 270 Anahita, a silicaceous S-type asteroid, is named after her. Based on the development of her cult, she was described as a syncretistic goddess, composed of two independent elements; the first is a manifestation of the Indo-Iranian idea of the Heavenly River who provides the waters to the rivers and streams flowing in the earth while the second is that of a goddess with an uncertain origin, though maintaining her own unique characteristics, became associated with the cult of the ancient Mesopotamian goddess Inanna-Ishtar.
According to a theory, this is attributed to a desire to make Anahita part of Zoroastrianism after diffusing from the extreme northwest to the rest of Persia. According to H. Lommel, the proper name of the divinity in Indo-Iranian times was Sarasvatī, which means “she who possesses waters”. In Sanskrit, the name आर्द्रावी शूरा अनाहिता means "of the waters and immaculate". Like the Indian Sarasvatī, Anāhitā nurtures herds. Only Arədvī is specific to the divinity; the words sūra and anāhīta are generic Avestan language adjectives, mean "mighty" and "pure". Both adjectives appear as epithets of other divinities or divine concepts such as Haoma and the Fravashis. Both adjectives are attested in Vedic Sanskrit; as a divinity of the waters, the yazata is of Indo-Iranian origin, according to Lommel related to Sanskrit Sarasvatī that, like its Proto-Iranian equivalent *Harahvatī, derives from Indo-Iranian *Saraswṇtī. In its old Iranian form *Harahvatī, "her name was given to the region, rich in rivers, whose modern capital is Delhi."
"Like the Devi Saraswati, nurtures crops and herds. Some historians note that that despite Anahita's Aryan roots and the way she represented the shared concept of the Heavenly River, which in the Vedas was represented by the goddess Sarasvatī, she had no counterpart in the ancient text who bear the same name or one that remotely resembled hers. In the Persian texts of the Sassanid and eras, Arədvī Sūra Anāhīta appears as Ardwisur Anāhīd; the evidence suggests a western Iranian origin of Anāhīta.. Anahita shares characteristics with Mat Zemlya in Slavic mythology. At some point prior to the 4th century BCE, this yazata was conflated with Semitic Ištar a divinity of "maiden" fertility and from whom Aredvi Sura Anahita inherited additional features of a divinity of war and of the planet Venus or "Zohreh" in Arabic, it was moreover the association with the planet Venus, "it seems, which led Herodotus to record that the learnt'to sacrifice to "the heavenly goddess"' from the Assyrians and Arabians."
There are sources. For instance, it was proposed that the ancient Persians worshiped the planet Venus as *Anahiti, the "pure one", that, as these people settled in Eastern Iran, *Anahiti began to absorb elements of the cult of Ishtar. Indeed, according to Boyce, it is "probable" that there was once a Perso–Elamite divinity by the name of *Anahiti, it is likely that it was this divinity, an analogue of Ishtar, that it is this divinity with which Aredvi Sura Anahita was conflated. The link between Anahita and Ishtar is part of the wider theory that Iranian kingship had Mesopotamian roots and that the Persian gods were natural extensions of the Babylonian deities, where Ahuramazda is considered an aspect of Marduk, Mithra for Shamash, Anahita was Ishtar; this is supported by how Ishtar "apparently" gave Aredvi Sura Anahita the epithet Banu,'the Lady', a Mesopotamian construct, not attested as an epithet for a divinity in Iran before the common era. It is unknown in the texts of the Avesta, but evident in Sassanid-era middle Persian inscriptions and in a middle Persian Zend translation of Yasna 68.13.
In Zoroastrian texts from the post-conquest epoch, the divinity is referred to as'Anahid the Lady','Ardwisur the Lady' and'Ardwisur the Lady of the waters'. Because the divinity is unattested in any old Western Iranian language, establishing characteristics prior to the introduction of Zoroastrianism in Western Iran is much in the realm of speculation. Boyce concludes that "the Achaemenids' devotion to this goddess evidently survived their conversion to Zoroastrianism, they appear to have used royal influence to have her adopted into the Zoroastrian